Archive for April 2008

It’s not, in fact, a video according to a certain usage of that term (moving images), but rather someone – an American, using the pseudonym Jason King – speaking to camera about Satanism, the ONA and David Myatt.

The speaker makes some good and interesting points, about Myatt and the ONA, stating that in his opinion:

(1) The Order of Nine Angles is the work of one man and one man alone: that is, David Myatt;

(2) The ONA is a genuinely sinister organization [i.e. striving to disrupt and cause Chaos and destruction], and that Myatt is a genius for creating it and obviously well understands the Occult in general and satanism in particular;

(3) The ONA has in effect created a new mythos;

(4) Myatt is a dangerous individual who is a “psychopath”.

(5) Myatt’s conversion to Islam is just a ruse, and he’s only using radical Islam to further his sinister, his Satanic, aims.

The speaker is also of the opinion that (a) Myatt’s ulterior motive – his primary aim – is a neo-nazi one, and that Myatt is still a neo-nazi; and that (b) the term “nine angles” was taken from Aquino’s socalled “Rite of the Nine Angles”, a point addressed by – and to some extent refuted by – the ONA in several of their documents, including Questions About David Myatt – An Interview with Richard Stirling, Exoteric Representative of the ONA:

Can we talk about the origin of the term the Order of Nine Angles? Was that taken from another, pre-existing, American based, group, as some people have surmised and claimed?

Not to my knowledge. According to my sources, the term was taken from a medieval alchemical manuscript, written in Arabic, and entitled Al-Kitab al-Aflak. What many of those involved with esoteric matters outside the ONA do not know is that many of the Arab alchemists, from whom many of the Western alchemists learned their trade or gained their knowledge from, considered there were nine emanations, or angles, and that there were different forms of Time – azal and dhar and zamal – for example. Myatt studied such matters, and developed, extended, these ideas, and gave them a modern slant. Hence causal, acausal, nine angles, and so on.

For those that don’t know, 5GW is “fifth generation war” which is a modern development of guerrilla warfare in which socalled “superempowered individuals” – often using modern technology – go around creating chaos and doing “terrible terrorist deeds”. The prediction of some conspiracy theorists is that “we’ve seen nothing yet” and that some of these “superempowered individuals” will cause carnage on an unprecedented scale. Such individuals are prefigured in people like Timothy McVeigh.

A 5GW Operative is someone who does “spooky action at a distance” – who is acting on behalf of those “powers-behind-the-scenes” that like to use chaos, and especially socalled “terrorist attacks”, as a pretext for increased government control, increased surveillance, and government tyranny. That is, such an operative is a new version of the traditional “spook” – someone who works alone and is ruthless.

According to some conspiracy theorists, David Myatt is at the very least an MI5 agent, and possibly a 5GW Operative, who has spent decades supporting ultra-violent causes, and inciting hatred and conflict and terrorism. Here is a quote from a recent article about some 5GW Operatives:

“David Myatt wears many masks: he’s a leading neo-nazi philosopher, he’s a Satanic occultist, and he’s also a radical Islamic cleric. Sounds crazy and gets far stranger than that…” (The Language of Power – article mentioning Myatt on Skilluminati Research blog, dated April 23, 2008)

Thus, Myatt’s role – according to such theories – has been to create “terrorist scares” (so as to give the government the excuse to “crack down on extremism and terrorism”) and to recruit individuals to do dastardly things. Individuals like David Copeland, or – more recently perhaps – some of the many, many British Muslims who in the past four years have plotted to massacre hundreds, if not thousands, of people in Britain, and elsewhere, and all but a few of which have been caught before they could explode their bombs.

According to such theories, the ONA – for example – was part of a spooky clandestine plan to recruit and train ruthless individuals who would be directed to cause chaos, and undertake the odd murder, or assassination or two, or let off the occasional bomb, and to generally create “terrorist scares”.

According to such theories, Myatt’s role in Combat 18 – for example – was very simple:

There’s much suspicion, on the both the left and right, that Combat 18 “was created by Britain’s internal security service MI5 to discredit the BNP while acting as a honey trap, or sting operation, designed to attract the most violent neo-Nazis in Britain into a single organization, where they could be monitored more easily.” (Nine Angles of Separation – an article about Myatt on the Rigorous Intuition blog, dated August 18, 2005)

According to such theories, Myatt has been a government spook for most of his adult life, having been recruited while at University, and having been trained by Column 88, which was part of the UK arm of NATO’s secret Gladio Cold War organization, whose task was to conduct sabotage in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe. Even Myatt’s two terms of imprisonment for violence are easily explained away by the parameters of this spook theory: designed to give him credibility in the violent milieu of the racist Right.

There is a rather neat symmetry to this theory about Myatt. To quote from the Rigorous Intuition article again:

“Is Myatt an agent provocateur, a shit-disturber who can’t settle upon a radical philosophy, something more, or something less? It’s difficult to assess motive, but consider that he has been arrested numerous times for such things as writing and disseminating “practical terrorist guides” on suspicion of conspiracy to murder. These cases have always been dropped due to “lack of evidence.” Does he enjoy protection? The record is suggestive that he does. And if it appears so, then we should ask the next question: Why?

Myatt may seem to have flitted from one politico-religious philosophy to another, but there is a terrible thread of continuity and rigour through his life and writings that suggests he is much more than a disingenuous provocateur. Naziism and Islamicism have served, in turn, as modalities of disruption for what remains at core an occult working to sow general chaos and division – the necessary passage of “Helter Skelter” to break down the Old Order, before the founding of the New.

So again: whose interests are served by there being a David Myatt? Is he is own man – or men – or does he belong to someone else? Or is it something else – an intelligence service perhaps…”

But it’s surely all too easy to interpret past actions, and writings, according to a certain theory. A certain theory which is – Simple? Absolutely. Satisfying? – certainly; giving symmetry? – indeed. But it doesn’t seem convincing, to me, once one starts to question it; there are, perhaps, too many inconsistencies. Such as – Myatt’s time as a Christian monk. Such as – Myatt’s Nature-loving, often mystical, often sad poetry, which is certainly at odds with the image of a ruthless (if not sociopathic) agent. Such as – Myatt’s personal letters and wrings (especially in the last three years) which seem to reveal a somewhat sensitive man, and is certainly at odds with the hate-filled, psychotic, rabid Jew-hating individual he is often portrayed to be.

Yet the supporters of such a theory about Myatt might well point out (and some of them have) that such “inconsistencies” are deliberate creations (by a master Trickster – a Master Shrencher in ONA-speak), designed to throw us off the scent, as it were. Convenient? You bet – like most conspiracy theories, which can always explain away those most inconvenient facts which seem to contradict the cherished theory.

For myself, I think there are two more reasonable, more plausible, explanations for the strange peregrinations evident in Myatt’s strange life.

The first – accepted by people like Julie Wright, who has extensively studied Myatt’s life and who knows him personally – is that:

“Myatt has been steadfastly and loyally following the sinister, Occult, path he chose nearly four decades ago, and that his exploits, experiences and involvements, have been and are linked to this path in two ways. Firstly, and to use the terminology of the ONA, part of his own inner quest, that is, internal magick – a magick which creates a new individual, two stages of which are Adeptship and Master. Secondly, part of the sinister strategy of the ONA, that is, aeonic magick which aims to change, disrupt, society itself – “to presence the dark” – and create some kind of warrior society, Dark Imperium or Galactic Empire. To achieve his aims he has ruthlessly – that is, Satanically – used such things as National Socialism, paganism, terrorism and even Islam.” (David Myatt: A Sinister Life?)

In this scenario, even Myatt’s Islam is a role. That is, he assumed the role of radical Muslim to further his own Occultic sinister, Satanic, agenda.

The second explanation is that Myatt’s life-long quest has been a profoundly individual one, which has indeed taken him from one (apparent) extreme to another (apparent) extreme, and that’s it ‘s been for him a voyage of personal (and Promethean) discovery.

Thus, it’s all a question of Myatt’s intent – of whether he’s been deliberately, and for decades, pursuing some sort of “sinister (or even neo-nazi) strategy”, or whether he’s just been an individual traveler, going his own way in his own time, learning from the experiences, and possibly taking a few of us to “where no one has gone before”.

There is, however, a third explanation – which I personally tend to favor – and this explanation is rather a blend of the previous two explanations. In this third scenario, Myatt started out with perhaps a sinister (and/or a neo-nazi) intent, but has in recent years – due to, as he says in many personal writings, pathei mathos – moved far away from this, as seems evident, for example, in his many (now unacknowledged) recent writings about The Numinous Way, which writings extol the virtue of compassion, personal love, and empathy. Thus, in the process, he has gone beyond National Socialism, beyond the Occult as manifest in the ONA, and beyond Islam, to create his own unique philosophy, which is evident in his recent poems, his recent personal letters and his most recent writings about The Numinous Way, which recent writings seems to have taken him beyond even “the abstraction of the folk” (refer to Note 1 below) to something seemingly entirely new, rather mystical and certainly ethical.

At this point, some comment should certainly be made about the many personal writings, and letters, and articles (about The Numinous Way) which have been circulating these past three years and which have been attributed to – but are publicly unacknowledged by – Myatt. My own, personal, view of this matter is that these items represent where Myatt is now, in his personal exploration; that is, they reflect his own thinking, his personal philosophy, his own beliefs, if you will, resulting from his decades-long and varied quest. However, he – at least for the moment – continues to project, to have, a rather different public image, which is that of still being Muslim. Why? In my view for two reasons. The first reason is because he still feels honorably bound by “the oath of loyalty” he gave on becoming Muslim, and the second is that he still regards radical Islam as the most effective practical way to fight “the dishonor of the New World Order” and so does not wish to publicly criticize it in any way.

Of course, I’m making assumptions here, and it’s only fair to give Myatt’s public comments on such matters, which are that he’s still a committed Muslim, and that (1) he did continue to develop The Numinous Way, for a while as a Muslim, but “as a Muslim, I regard my earlier philosophy, which I first called “Folk Culture” and then The Numinous Way, as kufr – a concealment of the reality, the truth, of Tawheed, and thus as a manifestation of Jahiliyyah” and (2) that some dates on some articles of his have been altered or added by “various people”; and there are some forgeries in circulation.

But – despite all this, despite all my ramblings, above – I’m sure most people will prefer the simplicity of either the conspiracy theory about Myatt, or the “sinister intent”/satanist theory about him, propounded by the likes of Julie Wright, and Searchlight. For, let’s face it, such theories – however fanciful or simplistic – are just so much more interesting and entertaining.

RS
April 2008 CE

Notes:

(1) See – for example – the updated version (dated 2454577.317) of his essay Pride and Presumption, the updated version of The Development of The Numinous Way and Other Questions (Revised 2454576.039) and Version 2.01 of his FAQ About The Numinous Way.

According to Professor George Michael, Myatt has “arguably done more than any other theorist to develop a synthesis of the extreme right and Islam.” [See Footnote 1]

Some years before the events of 9/11, and not long after his conversion to Islam, David Myatt outlined a strategy which involved National Socialists – and others on the extreme or “radical” Right – cooperating with radical, Jihadi Muslims in what he called “a world-wide struggle against our common enemies.” He identified these enemies as Zionists, international capitalism, and the New World Order.

The Aim

The immediate aim was the counter – both practically and ideologically – the influence and power of these enemies, with the eventual aim being the creation of a Khilafah, for Muslims, and a new racial nationalist, or National Socialist, government in one or more countries of the West.

To accomplish this strategy, Myatt set out to redefine National Socialism and racial nationalism – to, in his words, make them into honourable, and ethical, ways of life, although in his early days he conceived this more as a rediscovery of what he called “genuine National-Socialism”. Thus, he defined National Socialism as a combination of honour, loyalty and duty, stating that:

“What has hitherto not been very well understood in respect of National-Socialism, is that it is not race which defines our humanity – it is honour and reason. Race is our relation to Nature: how Nature is expressed, is manifest, in us. As such race is important and indeed vital; but so is honour. It is the combination of an acceptance of both race and honour which is National-Socialism. An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism. It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part. That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences.” Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism

In respect of National Socialist Germany, he wrote:

“With the defeat of Germany and its allies in the First Zionist War, National-Socialism was purified, emerging as a complete way of life, centred around honour, loyalty and duty. The political compromises needed to achieve power were gone, as were the supporters who did not understand or live up to the ideals of National-Socialism. The essence emerged as the shell covering the essence was destroyed in the crucible of that war. People who have described this essence include Savitri Devi, Miguel Serrano, and Leon Degrelle.

Since we now consciously understand this essence, it is possible to create – and only now possible to create – a genuine National-Socialist society. This would be an entirely new type of society and while the inspiration would be National-Socialist Germany, it would in many ways be very different, although it would manifest the same ethos, the same ideals.” Islam and National-Socialism

He then went on to state that:

A National-Socialist…..is a person who upholds the ideals of personal honour, who is loyal to those given loyalty and who strives to do their noble duty to their own people, and to Nature. A true National-Socialist lives by honour, and strives to do what is noble, just, and fair.

Honour means treating individuals with respect, with courtesy, regardless of the race or culture of those individuals, as it says in the National-Socialist Code of Honour. Honour means being fair. Racial prejudice – that is, judging someone by their race or culture – is unfair, because it is a pre-judging of others, and honour demands you only ever judge someone on the basis of personal knowledge of them.

Judgement of a person on the basis of race is like judgement of a person on the basis of hearsay, rumours, gossip – it shows a lack of honourable character on the part of the individual who so “judges”. Islam and National-Socialism

He further stated that:

How should we treat those – like others races, and Muslims – who now live in what were once our own, Aryan-only, homelands? Our own ethics provide the answer. We must be honourable, fair, and just. To treat such people with hatred, to be disrespectful toward them and their way of life, is dishonourable.

Our way is about love of our own folk; about being proud of our culture and heritage, respectful of the culture of other people and respectful of people who belong to other races and who live according to beliefs and ways different from ours. Our way is to honourably (and I stress honourably) strive for our own homeland where we can live according to our own Aryan laws. Such an honourable striving means seeking to find fair, just, rational, solutions to the problems of our times. Aliens and National-Socialism

The Reasoning

One of the reasons which Myatt gave for such an alliance, such cooperation, was outlined in his essay Why Islam Is Our Ally in which he stated:

“The respect that people like Leon Degrelle, Otto Ernst Remer and Adolf Hitler had for Islam arose from their understanding that Islam – authentic Islam – was the way of life of honourable warriors and produced a noble warrior society.

It was this respect – based upon honour – which also led to the alliance with Japan, for Adolf Hitler and other National-Socialists understood that the ethos of Imperial Japan was a noble warrior ethos: that the Japan of the time was seeking to restore Japanese values and a Japanese way of life, valuing as it did its ancient traditions, such as Bushido. The essence of this way was the rootedness in the past – in Shinto and Bushido – with each individual seeing their own life in relation to Japan, and its ethos. That is, there was a real sense of Destiny – a real honourable and warrior ethos where individuals were willing and prepared to sacrifice their own lives for the greater good, for their unique way of life. This pure, authentic, Japanese ethos is in complete contrast to the materialistic, consumer-capitalist ethos which now dominates Japan, and which is a direct result of their “Americanization” following their defeat in the First Zionist War – and it is this “Americanization” which the New World Order now seeks to impose upon the whole Muslim world, since the Muslim world is now the last bastion for warriors: for the practical warrior way of life which values tradition, the warrior ethos, and which, because of honour, has an awareness, an understanding, of the numinous – that is, an awareness, an understanding, of the sacred.

For, in all genuine warrior societies, there is this awareness and understanding of the numinous – there is that perspective, of genuine humility, which arises when the individual sees themselves in relation to what is beyond them and understands that there are limits to personal behaviour, and that some things are sacred: to be treasured. That is, their view of life is not that of materialism or of abstract impersonal un-numinous ideas – instead, they are connected, to their land, their people, their traditions, in a living way; they feel this, in their very being, and are prepared if necessary, and often willingly, to die for such things.

In essence, this is what the present conflict between Islam and the NWO is all about – the conflict between the warrior way of life and the materialistic, arrogant, profane ways of the modern West. It is a conflict between a living cultural tradition which is numinous (authentic Islam) – which values what is sacred and living – and an arrogant, soul-less, tyrannical power, the NWO. It is in truth a continuation of the armed struggle which began with the triumph of National-Socialism in Germany, and with the resurgence of an independent Japan. All three of these ways of life were and are essentially warrior ways – and all three were a direct challenge to the soul-less, the un-numinous, ignoble and profane materialism represented by the Zionist-dominated “West” with its capitalist-consumer culture and its dishonourable arrogance.”

Myatt’s National Socialist Ideology and the Importance of Honour

It is clear from many of his later (post 1997 CE) writings on National Socialism – such as The Meaning of National-Socialism (Third Edition, 115yf); The Theology of National-Socialism and The Complete Guide to the Aryan Way of Life – that Myatt sought to construct a new ideology which would be ethical and based upon both honour and a desire to conserve and extend the different races which he, and others, considered were creations of Nature.

Indeed, it would perhaps be fair to claim that it was the development of the ethical framework for this ideology that eventually took him away from National Socialism and caused him to develop what he first called the way, or philosophy, of Folk Culture, then called The Numinous Way of Folk Culture, and eventually called The Numinous Way.

With this new philosophy – which he explained in numerous articles and essays [See Footnote 2] – he developed the concepts, the ideas, of what he called The Cosmic Being, of Nature as a manifestation (or presencing) of this Being, and of honour as a manifestation of numinosity, of our true human nature, which he asserted was to evolve toward empathy and reason through excellence and self-control by pursuing idealism (or, as he later described it, by the pursuit of the numinous) and by using the power of our will.

His development of this new philosophy took him, over a period of some years, far beyond what he called the old un-numinous and dishonourable abstractions such as The State and political ideology, toward empathy and compassion, and he even made a distinction – in essays such as The Concept of The Folk and The Clan and The Numinous Way and Does Race Matter? A Controversial Answer and a New Ethical Beginning – between a race and a folk. He even went so far as to state:

“We must reform, evolve, ourselves through accepting a Cosmic morality that does not depend on amoral, inhuman, abstractions and which does not claim to have been revealed by some deity. For it is the struggle for abstractions, for abstract ideals – the struggle to implement such things – which is inhuman, which always leads to suffering, however noble and fine such ideals or abstractions might seem, and our foremost, fundamental, principle must be to alleviate suffering, to cease to cause suffering to any human being, or to any living thing.” Honour, Empathy and the Question of Suffering

Thus, he began to conceive of this Numinous Way as entirely non-political – as a personal “Way of Life”, a living in harmony with Nature, where there was an individual desire to avoid causing suffering:

“According to The Numinous Way, the change of agitation, of political strife, of revolution, of armed struggle, is a causal change, based in causal Time, and often or mostly causes suffering, creates suffering, adds to suffering, and more often than not does not contribute to the development of genuine inner harmony, to the presencing of the numinous. That is, it undermines and often destroys the beauty of Life, as the changes it provokes or causes or almost always only temporary ones, lasting a few years, a few decades, at most a hundred years or so. Thus, the suffering such causal provokations cause does not achieve what the adherents of such provokations believe they do. I, in my limited way, know this from experience, for I made this mistake myself, many times over the decades.” The Development of The Numinous Way and Other Questions

Hence, also, his advocacy of such things as vegetarianism (see for example his essays Some Practical Consequences of Cosmic Ethics,and The Numinous Way of Life).

All this, of course, took him far away from his earlier aim of cooperation between Muslims and National Socialists, an aim which he finally seemed to abandon around two years ago for reasons connected with his commitment to, and propagation of, what many term a radical, extremist, Islamist ideology, although Myatt himself – and many Muslims – decry the use of such “kaffir” terms in the context of Islam [See Footnote 3].

In respect of abandoning seeking such cooperation, Myatt wrote:

“I gradually came to understand two things. Firstly, that the majority of people involved today with the idea of racial separation, however they described themselves politically, were entrenched with their prejudiced attitudes, with their dislike, even hatred, of Islam and Muslims, but above all with an innate sense of superiority regarding what they called “Western civilization, culture, and values” which many if not most of them regarded as the creation of their own “superior” (or more “intelligent”) White race. Thus did many of them support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan by the Zionist-Crusader alliance, and thus did many of them say and write offensive things about Islam, about Muslims and about our beloved Prophet (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). Hence, the more I pursued this strategy of co-operation, the more I became aware of the wide gulf, the difference, between us: the more acutely I felt, knew and understood, the nobility, the honour, of Muslims (and especially of the Mujahideen) who strove to obey only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, and the hypocrisy, the dishonour, the arrogance, the hubris, the decadence, of the kuffar of the modern West. Perhaps, I thought – remembering what a loyal Comrade of Adolf Hitler once said to me – honourable National-Socialism had indeed died among the ruins of the Third Reich and with the defeat of the SS.

Secondly, I came to understand – as a result of my own deepening understanding of Deen Al-Islam aided by Muslims far more knowledgeable than I – that there really was no need for such co-operation: that my duty, as a Muslim, lay in presenting Islam, as it was, to the Unbelievers, and in personally striving to uphold, defend, and make the Word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala supreme.” Autobiographical Notes, Part 2 (dated Revised 1427)

“In respect of the so-called “extreme Right”, this means we want them to revert to Deen Al-Islam – to reject the Taghut of “race and nation” – to thus discover their true nature, their fitrah, as Muslims who bow down to only Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and who are thus prepared to undertake Jihad as Muslims.”

Myatt’s Writings

Myatt’s writings can be roughly divided into several categories:

1) His pre-1998 CE National Socialist and political writings, which were often polemical, strident, and sometimes racist.
2) His post 1998 CE National Socialist writings, where he began to develop his ethical view of National Socialism.
3) His early writings regarding Folk Culture, where he began to write about “the Cosmic Being”.
4) His later writings regarding The Numinous Way where he fully developed his ethical philosophy regarding empathy, compassion, and suffering.
5) His personal writings (private letters and poetry).
6) His early writings about Islam, from around 2000 CE
7) His later (2006 CE and subsequent) writings about Islam, where he began to write about Deen Al-Islam, Siyasah and so on.

Myatt’s writings regarding cooperation between Muslims and National Socialists fall into categories (2) and (3) above.

DL
Reichsfolk
119yf

Footnotes:

(1) Michael, George. The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right. University Press of Kansas (2006 CE).

(2) A reasonable understanding of Myatt’s The Numinous Way can be obtained by reading the following essays:

Frequently Asked Questions About The Numinous Way (version 1.5)

A Brief Analysis of The Immorality of Abstraction

The Numinous Way and the Way of The Folk

The Development of The Numinous Way and Other Questions

Cosmic Ethics and the Meaning of Life

Ontology, Ethics and The Numinous Way

The Social, Personal and Family Values of The Numinous Way

A Numinous Future – Beyond The State and The Nation

(3) Myatt has written – in the past two years and using his Muslim name Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt – many articles describing why Muslims should not use “kaffir” terms such as “ideology” and “extremism” in connection with Islam . See, for example,The Revival of Aql (dated 30 Zhul al-Qidah 1428) and Challenging the Kuffar, Changing the Focus (dated 7 Safar 1429).

Searchlight is a British monthly magazine produced by the anti-fascist Searchlight organization, which was founded in 1970’s by several Jewish anti-fascist activists. For over twenty years – beginning in the February 1984 issue – Searchlight regularly repeated rumors about, and made allegations concerning, Myatt’s alleged involvement with Satanism. Searchlight’s attacks on Myatt culminated in the April 1998 issue of the magazine which featured a photograph of Myatt – taken during a Combat 18 demonstration in London – on the front cover together with the headline “The Most Evil Nazi in Britain…” and a five-page story about Myatt and the Order of Nine Angles (ONA). In addition, Searchlight devoted two-pages to Myatt – under the headline David Myatt: Theoretician of Terror – in its “Special Edition” of July 2000 devoted to the London Nail-bomber, David Copeland.

The common feature of all these Searchlight stories about Myatt are: (1) the allegations that he is a Satanist, and that he either founded and leads the Order of Nine Angles, or is “a leading member” of the ONA; and (2) a lack of any evidence supporting these allegations.

Thus, and for instance, the article in the April 1998 issue boldly states: “Formed by Myatt himself in the 1980s, the ONA is a secret society that prides itself on following traditional Satanism…” No evidence whatsoever is presented to support this assumption that Myatt formed the ONA. Likewise, no evidence is presented elsewhere for Myatt’s involvement in either the ONA or with Satanism in general. The only shred of “evidence” they could find is that Thormynd Press, which published some of Myatt’s National Socialist writings and was set-up by Myatt himself, once allegedly shared a Post Office Box with another publisher who published some ONA writings. When asked about this, in an 1997 interview with Nick Lowles (now the Editor of the Searchlight magazine) Myatt simply stated that he was simply, and for a short period only, doing a favor for a “long-standing friend” some of whose views and activities he personally did not agree with. Neither Lowles nor anyone from Searchlight investigated the matter further, even though Myatt’s comment to Lowles is confirmed by private letters written by Myatt some years earlier to Professor Jeffrey Kaplan, author of several books in which Myatt is mentioned. [See, for example, footnote #51 of Kaplan’s book Nation and Race which also mentions a letter Myatt wrote, in July 1994, to a Mr Williams, stating that Myatt’s Occult involvement, such as it was, was mainly in the 1970’s and part of a clandestine campaign – which he elsewhere admitted he later abandoned – to convert some of those individuals to National Socialism.]

More recently, several newspaper articles about Myatt – which reproduce Searchlight’s allegations of Occult involvement by Myatt (without providing any evidence) – have included quotes from Searchlight’s Gerry Gable which continued Searchlight‘s attempts to defame and smear Myatt, alleging, for example, that Myatt was just using radical Islam to further his “anti-Establishment agenda” and that he was still a fanatical neo-nazi who was only pretending to be a Muslim.

In addition, a few years after the BBC Panorama program about Copeland which featured Myatt (which program was edited by a certain Nick Lowles) Searchlight seemed to change its tactics regarding Myatt. They ceased describing him as “a dangerous man” and instead said: “Myatt is a self-publicist who has claimed to have taken up many guises, including being a monk. Satanism is probably his overriding inspiration. He still supports neo-Nazi groups and contributes to their websites…” According to Myatt’s biographer, Julie Wright:

“This is certainly a shift in the tactics of his political opponents – Myatt has gone from being ignored (perhaps they hoped he would go away) to being portrayed as a hardened fanatic who is a “dangerous man” to now being portrayed as someone who just sits at home, on the Internet, and who has a “delusional fantasy life”. In fact, Myatt has such a “delusional fantasy life” that one journalist would only meet him with a former SAS soldier for a bodyguard; such a “delusional fantasy life” that the BBC film crew took along a pair of heavyweight “minders” when they interviewed him; and such a “delusional fantasy life” that another journalist – a fit, young, well-built and active man – was so fearful of Myatt’s reputation as a man of violence who “always carries a weapon” that he refused to meet Myatt on a not very isolated hill-top above an English town. Perhaps this journalist was aware that it once took seven Police Officers from the elite S012 unit to arrest Myatt early one morning.”

Furthermore, and somewhat strangely, the avowedly anti-fascist Searchlight has made no recent comment on the fact that Myatt – a Muslim since 1998 – has, many times in the past three years, publicly renounced his former neo-nazi views and confirmed his commitment to Islam, a commitment which precludes any involvement whatsoever with Satanism. Presumably, no such comment has been forthcoming by them because such a public disavowal, by Myatt, of his former views – and his apparent acceptance by other Muslims – means that their old tactics of defaming Myatt by accusing him of being a Satanist, and still a neo-nazi, would no longer work. Or possibly they have just lost interest in the man.

But, somewhat bizarrely, Michael Whine, Chairman of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, has been quoted as saying, in respect of Myatt:

“I would advise all Muslims to have nothing to do with this man.”

Which seems rather a strange comment to make – a Zionist Jew, leader of the most influential Jewish organization in Britain, telling Muslims what to do. Perhaps, after all, they do still regard him as “a dangerous man”.

The following item about Myatt – under various titles including David Myatt and Islam – has been appearing on many, mainly political, forums, world-wide, within the last month, and is posted under various user names.

So far, there have been about fifteen forums infested with this message, all of which messages are identical, which certainly does indicate a concerted campaign of disinformation by (probably) just one individual who has a rather unhealthy obsession with Myatt.

I say “disinformation” because the person makes a rather silly pretense of doing some “research” and asking for information about Myatt, stating that “the only information from independent sources that I can find is…” and then gives links to two sites which are far from being “independent sources”. One is a conspiracy site by a conspiracy nut; the other is a political organization which has been posting various unsubstantiated allegations about Myatt for over twenty years, and which is itself rumored to be linked to Britain’s MI5 (see the Wikipedia article about this “Searchlight” group for more info).

It is a silly pretense about asking for information about Myatt, because:

Anyone who’s seriously interested in the relationship that may exist between some Muslims and the far Right would have found and read Professor Michael’s book about the subject – The Enemy of My Enemy: The Alarming Convergence of Militant Islam and the Extreme Right – which provides some good info.

Anyone who’s seriously interested in David Myatt would have found the Wikipedia article about him

which provides a fairly balanced overview of the man, and gives references for further research.

The person also makes at least three factual errors in his two short paragraphs. The errors are:

(1) “he announced to the world”. Wrong – Myatt kept quiet about it for nearly two years.
(2) “It made quite an impact in the UK press at the time”. Wrong. It went unnoticed until two years later, after Myatt featured on BBC Panorama program about Copeland. Even then, there were only a few articles about Myatt.
(3) “since then I have heard nothing”. Wrong. Like I said, he missed the full page article in The Times newspaper, and Myatt’s Q&A session on Sheikh Qaradawi’s website, and Myatt’s interesting article “From Neo-Nazi to Muslim” which has appeared on many Islamic websites, including recently one in the UK, and one in Thailand.

The sources given by this obvious cyber-stalker are clearly hostile ones despite the stalker writing “I don’t think either of them is a hostile source…” [regarding Searchlight, see the upcoming article “David Myatt and Searchlight” which will appear on this blog soon].

It is possible that the offending author of the offending post is the young Canadian-based Zionist who has a Myatt obsession and who has been stalking Myatt for over seven years.

I reproduce the item in question as it has appeared on such forums, complete with links.

The Offending Post

I am interested in the relationship between Muslim extremism and the far Right.

A few years ago a guy called David Myatt announced to the world that he was converting to the muslim faith. Up to that point he had a strong involvement with various neo-nazi political groups. It made quite an impact in the UK press at the time, but since then I have heard nothing. The only information from independent sources that I can find is this:

I haven’t put any gaps in my links because I don’t think either of them is a hostile source. If there are any problems, will the Moderator please get in touch and I will change them.

Update and Addendum:

More on the New Myatt Stalker:

As reported above, an anonymous person has been posting dozens of messages to forums, world-wide, pretending to be doing some “research” into either David Myatt or into cooperation between Muslims and neo-nazis.

I write “pretending”, for the reasons given above, but to summarize: the obvious intent of this new stalker is to try to discredit Myatt by posting links to biased articles containing unproven allegations against Myatt while claiming that he/she “can only find” the posted “independent” links which are far from being “independent”.

In a new twist, the stalker posted an even more obsequious message that usual on an Islamic forum, giving the “usual two biased links”, as before, but added a quote from a forged item – questioning Myatt commitment to Islam – the like of which quote the zionist stalker (famous for his failed attempts to discredit Myatt on the Islamic Awakening forum) has posted several times before.

This post – like some of the other posts by the new stalker – drew the attention of a certain Myatt fan: someone who finds Myatt’s life interesting and respects his conversion to Islam. So, the fan replied to the stalker’s message on the Islamic forum, pointing out that the new stalker was possibly the zionist who had insulted the Prophet, Muhammad (which insult, many Muslims believe, carries the death penalty for Muslims and non-Muslims alike) and who had been stalking Myatt for around seven years.

This reply elicited an excited response from the new stalker: “I am so cross…Why is he stalking me?” he wrote, trying to deflect attention from his own stalking of Myatt by accusing the Myatt fan of stalking him, a familiar, and rather cry-baby, tactic which the “old” zionist stalker had also tried to use on numerous occasions, on Usenet and elsewhere. Obviously the new stalker forgets that he is the one who posted dozens of messages about Myatt, under various, different, user-names, pretending to ask to “information”, perhaps believing that he/she is being very clever by posting what they believe is a “cleverly crafted” message.

The stalker also accused the Myatt fan of being Myatt, another common ruse employed by obsessives in cyberspace obsessed with getting their obsession across.

Here is one of the replies by the Myatt fan (who for some conspiratorial reason often uses the user-name raffy) to the reply by the person who does seem to be rather obsessed with Myatt in a somewhat negative sort of way.

Anyone of any sagacity can see right through your “polite request” for info – as I pointed out in my first reply to your initial post.

Instead of answering the points I made about your post being just a trick to spread malicious rumors and allegations about Myatt, you now just use the tired old Usenet-type tactic of making accusations against me, of trying to shift the focus away from your factual errors, of which there are many.

So, what about the many factual errors contained in your original short post?

Thus, I repeat my points:

1) If you really are doing some serious research, then you would have found far more than the two spurious so-called “independent” items you linked to. Items such as books by Professor Kaplan, and Professor Michael.

2) If you had done even some preliminary, elementary research you would have found that Myatt did not “announce his conversion” to the world, as you claimed.

3) What about your error that “It made quite an impact in the UK press at the time…”? It went unnoticed for almost two years.

4) What about your error that “since then I have heard nothing…” ? Like I wrote, you missed the full page story in The Times newspaper; you missed Myatt’s question and answer session on Sheikh Qaradawi’s website. You missed an awful lot more.

5) What about your erroneous claim that the two sources you could find (obviously your Google or Yahoo searches are very different from mine) are “independent”? They are not independent in any shape or form. One makes the claim – without providing any evidence – that Myatt was/is an MI5 agent, and one is a political organization which even many on the Left in Britain find somewhat dubious because of its (alleged) links with MI5 and its past divisive actions within the Left. The people at Searchlight are just part of The Fourth estate: they do not deal in facts, but in innuendo, smear, allegations and assumptions.

As for the allegation that Myatt is MI5, this has now been taken further, with claims that he’s a 5GW operative (wow!) – but again, proof is lacking. It’s just assumption.

So, the conclusion is – due to all these errors and mistakes – that your post is just a ruse to spread unsubstantiated allegations about Myatt. If it was not, you would at the very least have given some other links which balanced the biased view of Searchlight – which, BTW, never presented any evidence for their allegations, ever. Check out:

Someone drew my attention, the other day, to a remarkable similarity between the many messages about Myatt, mentioned above, and messages posted some months ago, on forums like Stormfront, asking questions about a certain Richard Moult (ex-ONA).

The identity of the Moult stalker/troublemaker is well-known among esoteric-minded folk of the sinister kind (a few of whom have “put a hex on him”). This particular individual hails from Shropshire, and he has something of an unsavory reputation as a wife-beater, has a personal grudge against Moult, and has tried to sell stories of Moult’s involvement with the ONA, and with Myatt’s Reichsfolk, to various British tabloid newspapers, who just weren’t interested.

So, it’s possible that this person has now turned his attentions – for whatever warped reasons – to Myatt (a former personal friend of Moult’s).

But it’s also possible, of course, that it’s just the old zionist Myatt stalker (of Islamic Awakening forum fame) trying out new tactics, which have failed miserably.

There has been much discussion, on the Internet, in published articles and books, about whether or not David Myatt is or is not Anton Long; whether or not he is, or was, involved with (or founded) The Order of Nine Angles; and whether he is a Nazi, a Satanist or – as he himself now claims – a Muslim.

The salient facts are, briefly, as follows:

1) Despite many claims, no one has ever produced any evidence in support of the allegation, assumption and rumor that Myatt is Anton Long.

2) Myatt has always consistently denied being Anton Long.

3) Myatt has always denied being a Satanist, and has asserted that:

(a) He once – and decades ago, in the 1970’s and before he entered the novitiate of a Nazarene monastery – had a purely academic interest in the Occult as part of his Faustian desire to “seek wisdom and understanding”;

(b) He once – in the early 1970’s while active as a Nazi and again before he entered the novitiate of a Nazarene monastery – “conceived a plan to use or if necessary create secret Occult-type groups” with the subversive aim of using them to further his plan to “create a revolutionary situation which a National-Socialist group might take advantage of”. However, he soon abandoned this plan because “the meagre achievements were far outweighed by the problems these groups caused.”

(c) That no one has ever produced any evidence in support of the allegation, assumption and rumor that Myatt is a Satanist, despite Myatt’s repeated challenge for them to do so.

4) Since his conversion to Islam in 1998, Myatt has consistently renounced his Nazi, racist, views, and has been described by his former Nazi associates as a “race-traitor”.

5) Myatt gave a clue as to the real identity of Anton Long in an 1997 interview with Nick Lowles when he admitted to doing a favor for a “long standing friend”. This friend was, at that time, an Oxford academic.

6) According to the current exoteric head of the ONA, Myatt is not now, and never has been, a member of the ONA.

7) Since his conversion to Islam – and particularly in the years since 9/11 – Myatt has written a vast amount of articles, which confirm his commitment to Islam, which glorify Islamism, Jihad, and are in support of the Taliban and bin Laden.

Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude on the basis of such evidence that Myatt is not Anton Long; is not a Satanist; is neither the leader nor the founder of the ONA; and is, and has been, for nine years, not only a Muslim but also committed to propagating an extremist Islamist ideology.

References:

* Goodrick-Clarke, Nicholas. Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity. New York University Press, 2002

* Ryan, Nick. Homeland: Into A World of Hate. Mainstream Publishing Company Ltd., 2002

Well, we would comment that “he would say/write that…” – would he not? If he were involved – or had been involved – in such things, and wanted to continue causing disruption/Chaos (or whatever term we might use) to further his sinister goals, by, for instance, supporting such things as Jihad.

6) According to the current exoteric head of the ONA, Myatt is not now, and never has been, a member of the ONA.

Again, he/she/they would most certainly say/write that, especially if Myatt did indeed found (or take over the leadership of) the ONA, was the current Grand Master of it, and did not want his part in it to be made public.

7) Since his conversion to Islam – and particularly in the years since 9/11 – Myatt has written a vast amount of articles, which confirm his commitment to Islam, which glorify Islamism, Jihad, and are in support of the Taliban and bin Laden.

If it is assumed that this conversion and these articles was, and were, done from some hidden sinister motive, in pursuit of sinister aims (as quite a few people believe vis-a-vis Myatt) then such things are not strictly evidence in favour of the author’s claim that Myatt is a Muslim “committed to propagating an extremist Islamist ideology.”

Therefore, if one wants to assume, presume, or claim that Myatt was/is involved with the ONA, and that his aims were (and still are) sinister, then it is easy enough to interpret his life – and his various denials of involvement, and his various writings and activities – in this particular manner.

Thus, those who, like Myatt, propound or who (like the above author seem to) accept an alternative explanation (of Myatt’s non-involvement) only have, in their favour, the cited lack of evidence (of involvement). But even when, or if, some such direct evidence of such an involvement was forthcoming, that too could, most probably, be “explained away” in some manner by Myatt or those who accept (for whatever reason) the denial of involvement.

In addition, one might ask just what would constitute valid evidence of such involvement? A “kiss and tell” story of the kind beloved by dishonourable tabloid journalists? Compromising photographs of Myatt in black robe, with embroidered ONA sigil, at some “Satanic Black Mass”? A handwritten letter by Myatt admitting his involvement, or admitting to being Anton Long?

Perhaps some of Myatt’s vitriolic opponents (such as the person – one of the two notorious Myatt stalkers – who has in the past two years flooded forums, world-wide, with, for example, messages about “doing some research” into Myatt’s life) will now seek to concoct some forged evidence in favour of such involvement.

Until then, or even after then, we can continue – as usual – to either make, and accept, our own assumptions and theories about Myatt, or we can choose, for whatever reason, to believe Myatt himself.

For myself, I must admit to finding the “conspiracy theories” (of the MI5 agent or 5GW operative kind) much more intriguing, and much more interesting, than the dull denials. I also, personally, tend to favour the now, it seems, generally accepted theory – among esoteric-kind – of Myatt being Anton Long, the “shapeshifting” creator genius of the modern ONA mythos; of him pursuing, for many decades, dark and sinister aims, and of using both National Socialism and Islam as tactics in pursuit of such aims.

Is
David Myatt A Muslim?

This question has been asked with surprising frequency –
mostly by Myatt’s former political opponents, such as the anti-fascist Searchlightorganization
– since Myatt’s conversion to Islam became publicly known, in the year
2000 CE. Myatt himself has steadfastly maintained that he is a Muslim,
and has issued several public denunciations of his former racist,
nationalist and neo-nazi views and – since around 2000 CE – has
written, using his Muslim name of Abdul-Aziz, literally hundreds of
essays and articles about, and praising, Islam.

Several of Myatt’s former political enemies – and some
Zionists,
opposed to the radical Islamist views he has propounded for nearly ten
years – have stated many times that they believe that his conversion
was just a ploy, a subterfuge, to further what they claim are still his
neo-nazi aims. However, considering that Myatt is now regarded, by the
majority of his former nazi and racist “comrades” – and by most “White
nationalists” – as a race traitor, and considering Myatt’s praise of
Islam, his many articles critical of “the kuffar”, and especially his
public denunciation of racialism racism, nationalism and National
Socialism, this claim is highly unlikely if not erroneous. How can
praising Islam, stridently denouncing and rejecting his former
political views – and being regarded by neo-nazis as a race-traitor –
be considered as “aiding neo-nazism”? In my opinion, it cannot, and
this particular argument advanced by some individuals is therefore
untenable.

It also does appear as if the zealous opponents of Myatt have
sometimes gone to great lengths to discredit him, as a Muslim, for
instance by posting fake articles which they claim he has written, or
by adding or altering the dates on some of his already Internet
published items, or even – in one instance – setting up a complete fake
site replete with articles with Myatt’s name on them.

Other opponents of Myatt – for whatever reason and from
whatever
motive we can only speculate – claim that Myatt, in fact, never
converted to Islam at all, but only claimed that he did, although this
claim is easily disproved since Myatt, around 2003 CE, released a
digitally scanned image of his Testimony of Faith
in Islam, signed by two witnesses to his Shahadah, and by the Director
of the Islamic Foundation,
Dr. M.M. Ahsan. This certificate is dated 15 Sept 1998/24 Jumada Al-Ula
1419 and Myatt’s Shahadah was at Jamia Masjid Ghousia, Worcester, on
the 6 September 1998 and his witnesses were Hafiz Mohammad Tufail and
Qadi Abdur Sa’ouf. Myatt regularly attended prayers at Mosques in that
area for many years after his conversion.

Still other opponents of Myatt – again, for whatever reason
and from
whatever motive we can only speculate – have claimed that, even if he
did convert at a Mosque, it was just a sham, and part of some sinister
plan of his to disrupt society and further what they also claim are his
“satanic aims”. For the individuals making this claim – for which they
have no evidence whatsoever – also claim, again without evidence, that
Myatt is “Anton Long”, the assumed founder and leader of the notorious
sinister organization, the Order of Nine Angles. However, even if we
assume – for the sake of argument – that Myatt was Anton Long, and was
the founder of the this ONA, then Myatt’s conversion to Islam could and
would signify a complete rejection of such things, something which
seems quite evident from the fact that Myatt himself has, since his
conversion, produced voluminous writings about and in praise of Islam.

However, some former supporters of Myatt – and, indeed, some
Occultists – have put forward various conspiracy-like theories in which
they also claim, again without a shred of evidence, that Myatt is only
“using” Islam for some devious political, and/or, some devious Occult
purpose, perhaps – in the case of the neo-nazis – choosing not to
believe that their former “neo-nazi hero” has indeed converted to
Islam, and choosing – in the case of the Occultists – not to believe
that the person they assume is the “sinister genius, Anton Long” could
and did convert to Islam and has remained a Muslim for over ten years.

Perhaps the most important fact to be remembered about all
these
claims, is that they are only unsubstantiated claims, for no evidence
in support of them has ever been presented, although, for over five
years, a certain Zionist, renowned for his obsession with and hatred of
Myatt – for whatever reason and from whatever motive we can only
speculate – trolled Internet newsgroups and some Islamic forums with
such claims, claiming to have “evidence” which, when presented, was
shown to be fallacious, as happened, for instance, on the Muslim
Islamic Awakening forum, where several Muslims came to
Myatt’s defence.

Which leads us on to the fact that Myatt is accepted, as a
Muslim,
by Muslims, and has even taken part – on well known and “moderate”
Islamic website – in a live dialogue where he replied to questions
submitted to him by Muslims, world-wide. While some Muslims have been
critical of Myatt’s radical Jihadi stance, others have praised his
Islamic writings, and many of his radical Islamist tracts have been
published, under his name, on various Islamist websites and blogs.
Indeed, a recent translation of Myatt’s article The Aims of
Al-Qaeda – on a website run by an Imam deported from a
European country for being associated with Al-Qaeda –
has the word hafizahullah
(apparently, a term of respect, meaning “may Allah protect him”) after
Myatt’s Muslim name, and a fellow Muslim has, at the time of writing
(November 21, 2008 CE) collected Myatt’s Islamist writings together and
placed them on a website under the title The Writings of
Sheikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt.

Given the complete lack of evidence to support the various
claims
made about Myatt’s conversion to Islam, and about him being “Anton
Long”; given Myatt’s many public statements affirming his Islam and his
renunciation of his former political views; given Myatt’s voluminous
articles praising Islam and denouncing the kuffar, and kufr, of the
West; and especially given Myatt’s acceptance by other Muslims, the
sensible, rational, conclusion is that, yes, Myatt did convert to Islam
and, yes, David Myatt is, and remains, a Muslim.

However, I am sure that this conclusion – and the facts
supporting
it – will not deter Myatt’s detractors from continuing to make their
unsupported claims, and from continuing to make allegations about
Myatt. I am also sure that this conclusion will come as a
disappointment to those “neo-nazis” and Occultists who have spun
various conspiracy-like theories around Myatt’s conversion.